Calling out fellow cyclists for illegal or dangerous behavior

rubadub · 23-10-2019 9:41pm

site_owner wrote: »

Saw this tweet earlier...
Even if something happened off camera, seems inexplicable

https://twitter.com/TaxiDave198/status/1186962757163388933?s=19

pulls out in front of "taxi dave" pulls on brakes, starts wandering all over the place. My guess would be he is mimicking what he did to him.

Tombo2001 · 23-10-2019 9:45pm

rubadub wrote: »

pulls out in front of "taxi dave" pulls on brakes, starts wandering all over the place. My guess would be he is mimicking what he did to him.

Check out this earlier tweet from taxi Dave....

https://mobile.twitter.com/TaxiDave198/status/1127561393765588992

23-10-2019 11:22pm

Yeah I'd like to see the previous to that video, guy on the bike is so wrongs reacting like that but me thinks taxi Dave has been selective in what was shown there.

buffalo · 24-10-2019 8:12am

Effects wrote: »

Yeah, she's amassed 20,000 followers in about a week. She's been on the radio a few times I think.
She seems like she has some kind of personality issue but it's borderline, so people think it's ok to have a go at her.
Most people are joking in good spirits, but some take it a bit too far.

https://twitter.com/Barrywfinnegan/status/1186973101185294341

LeChienMefiant · 24-10-2019 9:16am

Effects wrote: »

Yeah, she's amassed 20,000 followers in about a week. She's been on the radio a few times I think.
She seems like she has some kind of personality issue but it's borderline, so people think it's ok to have a go at her.
Most people are joking in good spirits, but some take it a bit too far.

This is the correct form for anyone who is featured on Angela's page without consent. This is GDPR at work, thank the EU for your right to privacy.
https://help.instagram.com/contact/504521742987441?helpref=page_content
Instagram will look for proof of identity to confirm you are the person featured.

Effects · 24-10-2019 10:03am

Do you have a right to privacy when you are in a public space though?

LeChienMefiant · 24-10-2019 10:15am

Effects wrote: »

Do you have a right to privacy when you are in a public space though?

GDPR is very clear on what is private information and how it must be handled.

Stark · 24-10-2019 10:18am

Taking a photograph of someone in a public place isn't illegal in itself. If the photograph is publicly posted for the purposes of harassing the person in the photograph, then it is. Which is the case here.

LeChienMefiant · 24-10-2019 10:22am

Stark wrote: »

Taking a photograph of someone in a public place isn't illegal in itself. If the photograph is publicly posted for the purposes of harassing the person in the photograph, then it is. Which is the case here.

Even if you don't publish it, by storing it you become a data controller (possibly not the GDPR terminology) surely?

Stark · 24-10-2019 10:29am

There's "Household exemption" and exemptions for the purposes of "artistic expression".

For example privacy invaders street artists can take creepy invasive candid photographs of people on the street without permission and it's legal as long as the photographs go unpublished.

magicbastarder · 24-10-2019 11:01am

nonsense racist ****e deleted; apols to people challenging it but those posts were removed too.

magicbastarder · 24-10-2019 11:05am

MarkY91 - do not post in this thread again.

Effects · 24-10-2019 5:02pm

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

GDPR is very clear on what is private information and how it must be handled.

Can you show me where is says that a picture of someone in a public space can't be posted to social media?

Time · 24-10-2019 5:51pm

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

Even if you don't publish it, by storing it you become a data controller (possibly not the GDPR terminology) surely?

No you don't, the lack of understanding people have around GDPR is actually astounding.

Art.2 of the regulation states that it applies "to the processing of personal data wholly or partly by automated means and to the processing other than by automated means of personal data which form part of a filing system or are intended to form part of a filing system." not only does recording someone on the street not fall within that scope but "personal activities" are specifically exempted.

What she is doing is clearly a personal activity and whether people like it or not she's not doing anything illegal (unlike her subjects).

Hrududu · 24-10-2019 6:06pm

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sharing-videos-on-social-media-not-the-way-to-report-crime-garda-1.3775031%3fmode=amp

Hmm I wonder if the same will happen here.

For those not wanting to click it’s a story about the guards asking cyclists to take down videos from social media showing motorists up to no good.

The Garda’s main Twitter account said people who were identified, or whose vehicles were identified by their registration in the videos or photos were entitled to their good name.

LeChienMefiant · 24-10-2019 6:12pm

Time wrote: »

What she is doing is clearly a personal activity and whether people like it or not she's not doing anything illegal (unlike her subjects).

All I know is I've had my photo removed from instagram using the following text:

I contest that publishing my photo violates my privacy rights under GDPR. I have not consented to publication of my image, there is no legitimate interest in publishing my image.

Time · 24-10-2019 6:14pm

Hrududu wrote: »

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sharing-videos-on-social-media-not-the-way-to-report-crime-garda-1.3775031%3fmode=amp

Hmm I wonder if the same will happen here.

For those not wanting to click it’s a story about the guards asking cyclists to take down videos from social media showing motorists up to no good.

There's a difference between it being undesirable and illegal, the gardai aren't going to do anything on the back of a video, unless its something particularly egregious like that video from citywest yesterday, or the one from cavan that was reported today. Note that they don't say you can't just that they'd rather it not happen.

Time · 24-10-2019 6:16pm

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

All I know is I've had my photo removed from instagram using the following text:

Thats all well and good, but they likely do as policy that due to resources required to investigate. Anyway people would be better focusing on the activity that she's actually filming, rather than her doing it, if they weren't breaking the law there'd be no story in the first place.

dubrov · 24-10-2019 6:25pm

There's a GDPR addiction on boards at the moment.

Half the threads seem to end up as a monotonous discussion about what does and doesn't constitute a breach resulting in everyone else abandoning the threads due to boredom

LeChienMefiant · 24-10-2019 6:44pm

Time wrote: »

Thats all well and good, but they likely do as policy that due to resources required to investigate. Anyway people would be better focusing on the activity that she's actually filming, rather than her doing it, if they weren't breaking the law there'd be no story in the first place.

I've had direct experience and her posts lack context. You're only getting one side of the story.

Time · 24-10-2019 6:54pm

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

I've had direct experience and her posts lack context. You're only getting one side of the story.

Then discuss that instead, because she has several videos up (not all) that clearly show people breaking lights and lots of photos of people illegally parking. There’s no contextual issue with those but if there’s an issue with some of the others then let people know.

LeChienMefiant · 24-10-2019 7:05pm

Time wrote: »

Then discuss that instead, because she has several videos up (not all) that clearly show people breaking lights and lots of photos of people illegally parking. There’s no contextual issue with those but if there’s an issue with some of the others then let people know.

Plenty of discussion in thread.

Stark · 24-10-2019 7:22pm

Also quite a few where the person is doing nothing illegal. Except maybe for cycling full stop which wouldn't surprise me if she considers "illegal". Like the guy, heaven forbid having both hands on the handlebar in the middle of a turn.

Time · 24-10-2019 8:10pm

Stark wrote: »

Also quite a few where the person is doing nothing illegal. Except maybe for cycling full stop which wouldn't surprise me if she considers "illegal". Like the guy, heaven forbid having both hands on the handlebar in the middle of a turn.

Totally agree, but this thread is about calling out bad behaviour and she's quite a topical example of someone who is doing it, but it seems to make some people here uncomfortable, and the classic whataboutery of drivers gets brought up, or like you have, people focus on the exception rather than the rule (and having looked at her full insta 90% are people obviously breaking the law) rather than just accepting that some cyclists are selfish road users who couldn't give a **** about the law when if it means getting somewhere five minutes quicker. The road is a shared space for all of us, and bad behaviour by any user should be condemned irrespective of whether they're pedestrian motorist or cyclist.

CramCycle · 24-10-2019 10:10pm

She is harmless, can't see why anyone is giving her the time of day, basically she is the internet without the privacy. People ranting about sh1t, some of it important, some of it not. Unless she is being physically abusive, who cares.

Guy ran through a red light today, in his car, and I let a shout. Taxi driver rolled up beside me, smiled and said, I needed to go home and take a break, the stress isn't worth it. He was 100% right. Now I wasn't stressed, I just have a boring voice which makes me sound serious or angry all the time, I was actually trying to warn the driver but the taxi guy still made me smile.

I hope it is taxi dave and I get a video.

AndrewJRenko · 24-10-2019 10:52pm

Time wrote: »

The road is a shared space for all of us, and bad behaviour by any user should be condemned irrespective of whether they're pedestrian motorist or cyclist.

It's a completely false equivalence.

https://www.roadbikerider.com/correcting-the-false-equivalencies-in-the-cars-vs-cyclists-debate-d5/

Do you not wonder about why she never posts videos of the 1 or 2 or 3 drivers that break the lights at every change of lights in Ranelagh?

magicbastarder · 24-10-2019 10:58pm

CramCycle wrote: »

I hope it is taxi dave and I get a video.

he might not upload the video if you sounded boring, as you say. taxi dave wants action and drama.

Time · 24-10-2019 11:12pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's a completely false equivalence.

https://www.roadbikerider.com/correcting-the-false-equivalencies-in-the-cars-vs-cyclists-debate-d5/

Do you not wonder about why she never posts videos of the 1 or 2 or 3 drivers that break the lights at every change of lights in Ranelagh?

It’s the complete opposite of a false equivalence. Breaking a red light is breaking a red light the law makes no distinction as to bike and car in that regard they’re completely equal. In reality that’s what matters and that link is just a subjective opinion piece.

As for motorists roughly 70 of her 200 posts are about motorists and parking with another 20-30 being unrelated to traffic at all, so that leaves 100 max on cyclists so hardly like she’s only posting about cycling.

Why have people such difficulty with accepting that the people breaking red light shouldnt be without pointing the finger and shouting we’ll the cars did it first or some nonsense like that

AndrewJRenko · 24-10-2019 11:22pm

Time wrote: »

As for motorists roughly 70 of her 200 posts are about motorists and parking with another 20-30 being unrelated to traffic at all, so that leaves 100 max on cyclists so hardly like she’s only posting about cycling.

The motorist posts are all about parking, right? No posts about drivers breaking red lights, or moving past the stop line, or speeding or using their phones? The issues that cause drivers to kill people with alarming regularity.

Time wrote: »

Why have people such difficulty with accepting that the people breaking red light shouldnt be without pointing the finger and It’s the complete opposite of a false equivalence. Breaking a red light is breaking a red light the law makes no distinction as to bike and car in that regard they’re completely equal. In reality that’s what matters and that link is just a subjective opinion piece. we’ll the cars did it first or some nonsense like that

Probably because it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the road and maim many more. That's why it's not 'completely equal'.

rubadub · 24-10-2019 11:39pm

I think she is hilarious, I am still wondering if this is some clever windup satire account, taking us all for fools, trying to sabotage those who might be posting legit complaints/examples. She is advertising hoodies for sale now, would be funny if it was a money making scam
https://www.instagram.com/angela.fahy.1.0/

I have only seen a few and the majority are pretty much benign acts, not really what the law actually set out to prevent, stuff a reasonable garda would not give a damn about -e.g. somebody in loads of high viz gear who does not have the legally required reflector.

Does she always ignore all the pedestrians breaking reds?

Time · 25-10-2019 12:18am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The motorist posts are all about parking, right? No posts about drivers breaking red lights, or moving past the stop line, or speeding or using their phones? The issues that cause drivers to kill people with alarming regularity.

Probably because it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the road and maim many more. That's why it's not 'completely equal'.

Ok so it’s grand for cyclists to brake the law (which is what this thread is about) but not motorists got it

site_owner · 25-10-2019 12:25am

Time wrote: »

Ok so it’s grand for cyclists to brake the law (which is what this thread is about) but not motorists got it

Its not a rant thread, it's about whether it's worthwhile calling other people on their behavior and, if it is, when and how should it be done.

A lot of people have an opinion that minor law breaking by Cyclists is not really a problem. based on the fact that 99.99% of damage and death is caused by drivers and that other countries have very different laws for cyclists (Idaho stop etc) with little to no issue.

If you want to rant about cyclists there are other places you'll get more support

Time · 25-10-2019 1:19am

site_owner wrote: »

Its not a rant thread, it's about whether it's worthwhile calling other people on their behavior and, if it is, when and how should it be done.

A lot of people have an opinion that minor law breaking by Cyclists is not really a problem. based on the fact that 99.99% of damage and death is caused by drivers and that other countries have very different laws for cyclists (Idaho stop etc) with little to no issue.

If you want to rant about cyclists there are other places you'll get more support

I’m not looking to rant at all, I happen to think that we all know it’s against the rules to run red lights and can’t complain when called out on regardless of what mode of transport we use. But there’s serious whataboutery going on here, and arguments along the lines that everyone but cyclists are wrong

AndrewJRenko · 25-10-2019 7:07am

Time wrote: »

Ok so it’s grand for cyclists to brake the law (which is what this thread is about) but not motorists got it

Maybe you could try arguing with something that I actually said?

Macy0161 · 25-10-2019 8:09am

In the car today. Motorists I saw breaking red, circa 10, including 3 going through a clear red onto Fosters Avenue from the N11 through a pedestrian Green (obviously the left turn red didn't apply to them once straight on got the green). That's not including amber gamblers. Cyclists breaking red - zero.

Time · 25-10-2019 9:19am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Maybe you could try arguing with something that I actually said?

Well you're bringing it back to what drivers do rather than other cyclists, which is what this thread is about. Why no condemnation of bad cycling behaviour? So you'll forgive me for believing that you have no problem with cyclists breaking the law and instead only care when drivers do it.

AndrewJRenko · 25-10-2019 4:27pm

Time wrote: »

Well you're bringing it back to what drivers do rather than other cyclists, which is what this thread is about. Why no condemnation of bad cycling behaviour? So you'll forgive me for believing that you have no problem with cyclists breaking the law and instead only care when drivers do it.

I haven't condemned ISIS or Pol Pot recently either. Do you assume that I've no problem with them also? Is there some level of outrage that I'm supposed to reach?

Every Garda hour spent chasing cyclists breaking red lights is an hour not spent reducing the death toll on the roads.

work · 25-10-2019 8:48pm

Every Garda hour spent chasing cyclists breaking red lights is an hour not spent reducing the death toll on the roads.[/quote]

I absoloutely agree but laws should be obeyed and we should canvass for better laws and infrastructure for cyclists.

A simple way to pay for Garda enforcement is charge fees for breaking the law based on danger caused. As such a cyclist on the path going carefully would be 10 cents or breaking a red 10 euro. Drivers on the phone 1000 euro and tailgating 5000 euro. I doubt there would be an issue paying the extra traffic Garda then? Added benefit of saving lives and making the roads more comfortable. So simple and nobody can complain laws aren't enforced!

CramCycle · 25-10-2019 10:17pm

Financial fines won't work, they will go to court on every single one and jam up the system. A far better one would be a driving ban, effective immediately. Phone use and red light jumping. 1 year ban for both with immediate notification to the insurance company. The last one would do the most damage and the threat would stop alot although the number on English plates would suggest many don't care. This could be helped my immediate seizure and crushing order on anyone with an attachment to the state.

work · 26-10-2019 12:28am

CramCycle wrote: »

Financial fines won't work, they will go to court on every single one and jam up the system. A far better one would be a driving ban, effective immediately. Phone use and red light jumping. 1 year ban for both with immediate notification to the insurance company. The last one would do the most damage and the threat would stop alot although the number on English plates would suggest many don't care. This could be helped my immediate seizure and crushing order on anyone with an attachment to the state.

Can't agree change the system, Garda do xyz and get a conviction. I like the idea of immediate crush notice. Also immediate removal of any yellow plate cars with infractions. Really need to just pull the finger out!

Duckjob · 27-10-2019 7:48pm

I'm always amazed by how many legal obstacles manage to present themselves with regards to toughening legislation around motoring offenses in Ireland.

I beieve in Norway you can get your car impounded and instant jail time for being caught > 20kph over the limit without it even going to court. I struggle to understand whats so special about here that implementing strict laws (the type that actually modify peoples behaviors for the better) seems to be so so difficult.

RobbieMD · 27-10-2019 8:45pm

Duckjob wrote: »

I'm always amazed by how many legal obstacles manage to present themselves with regards to toughening legislation around motoring offenses in Ireland.

I beieve in Norway you can get your car impounded and instant jail time for being caught > 20kph over the limit without it even going to court. I struggle to understand whats so special about here that implementing strict laws (the type that actually modify peoples behaviors for the better) seems to be so so difficult.

I can’t see instant prison terms without going to court first ever happen here. We have the right to fair procedures and access to the courts. Part of that is the opportunity to rebut an allegation and examine evidence against you. Circumventing that would be tantamount to the constitution.

I think in general our traffic legislation is fairly decent. It’s the enforcement and technological side that lets it down.

tomasrojo · 28-10-2019 9:06am

I looked up about the Norwegian arrangement, and this seemed relevant:

About the jail part, I’m Norwegian and was caught at 106 km/h (about 110 before % margins) in a 60 zone, and I officially got 16 days in prison. But I don’t have to actually serve the time, It works more like a probation (2 years) where if you get caught doing “prisonworthy” speeding again you are likely to actually go to prison. The fine was about 900 Euro though, paying about 50 each month for 2 years, but if you’re not living in the Nordic countries or intend to visit Norway again in the next years you can safely ignore it.

http://www.speedingeurope.com/norway/

AndrewJRenko · 28-10-2019 12:39pm

Duckjob wrote: »

I'm always amazed by how many legal obstacles manage to present themselves with regards to toughening legislation around motoring offenses in Ireland.

I beieve in Norway you can get your car impounded and instant jail time for being caught > 20kph over the limit without it even going to court. I struggle to understand whats so special about here that implementing strict laws (the type that actually modify peoples behaviors for the better) seems to be so so difficult.

I'm all in favour of toughening legislation, but how about we implement existing legislation effectively as a first step.

If speeding drivers had any vague expectation of actually being caught, habits would change very quickly. Same for those using their phones and blasting through red lights.

magicbastarder · 28-10-2019 12:56pm

i suspect this (not unwelcome) law will simply become another law for the gardai to not enforce.

tdf7187 · 28-10-2019 7:13pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

i suspect this (not unwelcome) law will simply become another law for the gardai to not enforce.

It's basically unenforceable. Plus as you rightly imply they don't even bother enforcing the laws that are actually there.

AndrewJRenko · 28-10-2019 7:16pm

tdf7187 wrote: »

It's basically unenforceable.

Why? Enforcement is working in many other countries.

07Lapierre · 28-10-2019 7:47pm

If only the Gardai would accept video evidence from GoPro’s...it could then be enforced by everyone.

tdf7187 · 28-10-2019 7:56pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why? Enforcement is working in many other countries.

Let's see some links.

site_owner · 28-10-2019 8:07pm

Lastly, our results underscore the irreplaceable role of human resources in reducing the number of traffic fatalities. Human resources are an indispensable component that enables the implemented strategies to achieve their full effectiveness through legislation. In addition, the value (and significance) of the coefficient for police officers over that for their productivity, measured by numbers of reported violations, highlight the work done by law enforcement, not only with respect to punishment but also deterrence and raising intercity road users’ awareness by their mere presence.

From legislation to compliance: The power of traffic law enforcement for the case study of Spain

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0967070X18303299

Calling out fellow cyclists for illegal or dangerous behavior

Comments